Wired article on Net Neutrality: FCC Chief weighs in

[keefe]

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/fcc-chairman-wheeler-net-neutrality/

[Spotcheck Billy]

superbar

[LAMUfan]

I don't know man, If this net neutrality stuff goes south it's really going to effect Juan Anderson's jumper, I heard he was very concerned.

[naginiF]

I never check the superbar so i'm glad this was posted on the Al so i can follow any discussion that happens.  Having worked 15 years on the provider side and the last 4 on the entrepreneur side i fully understand both arguments (in a way over simplified and ignoring big government vs small government way). 

There isn't enough competition on the provider side (non wireless at least) to prevent gouging on what is a substandard experience* currently.  If I had to pay to get my internet based service to my clients at a reasonable pace I never would've been able to launch my company.

On the other hand we're not giving the entrepreneurial spirit nearly enough credit if we think that people wouldn't find opportunity in any environment and the providers should be able to commoditize their assets in accordance to what the market will bear. 

In the end I do think that we are better off as a whole with net neutrality.  More from a new business development, and the exchange of ideas, cultures and awareness of beauty and tragedy in the world than from a regulation vs. capitalism perspective.  Even if it has given a stage for people to use anonymity to try and drive discord  .


*I'm fortunate that I live in an area with Google Fiber and believe me it's WAY faster (literally a gig a second download when plugged into the wall), cheaper ($120/mo for cable and internet), and more dependable (one outage for a couple hours in the 18 months we've had it) than anything else i've experienced.  Also, if you look at average speed in US versus other industrialized nations we're mediocre at best.

[ChicosBailBonds]

....if you like your internet, you can keep your internet....

[ChicosBailBonds]

Cuban is having a field day with it

https://twitter.com/MCuban

[Mutaman]

....if you like your internet, you can keep your internet....

Chico is worried that the government is going to force him to eat broccoli. Its causing him to lose sleep at night.

[naginiF]

Cuban is having a field day with it

https://twitter.com/MCuban

.@kevdog @FCC the point is that we haven't seen mega bw 500mbs and faster apps and now we probably won't

He needs to move to a Google Fiber city.  Shocking that Austin is one and DFW isn't.

[Desert_warrior]

Since he is the CEO and Chairman of a cable television network, it isn't shocking at all that he would be against net neutrality.

[chapman]

He needs to move to a Google Fiber city.  Shocking that Austin is one and DFW isn't.

I, for one, am welcoming our Google overlords.

[MUsoxfan]

Telecom stocks jump 2-7% on this news. Financial disaster indeed...

[ChicosBailBonds]

Since he is the CEO and Chairman of a cable television network, it isn't shocking at all that he would be against net neutrality.

LOL

He also made his first millions in the computer space.  Made his first billions on an internet platform driven company.  He is also a huge investor in Netflix, etc.

I've known Mark for 20 years...the man isn't stupid.  Treating the internet like a utility is the epitome of stupid.  The problem is that he understands what this means, while most Americans haven't a clue. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

.@kevdog @FCC the point is that we haven't seen mega bw 500mbs and faster apps and now we probably won't

He needs to move to a Google Fiber city.  Shocking that Austin is one and DFW isn't.

You mean a google fiber neighborhood within that google fiber city.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Telecom stocks jump 2-7% on this news. Financial disaster indeed...

Wow....just wow.   I think you really meant that, too.

[mreezybreezy]

Here's the thing. Average connection speeds in this country are ABYSMAL when compared to other developed nations. The federal government has gifted the telecoms BILLIONS of dollars and, for the most part, they just pocketed the money and did nothing to improve our infrastructure. So yeah, we've tried the pseudo laissez faire stuff with the telecoms when it comes to providing internet service in this country and they failed. If they didn't want government intervention maybe they should have done their jobs in the first place. The only people who are against net neutrality are those that work in the telecom industry or stand to profit from the way the system is currently setup.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Here's the thing. Average connection speeds in this country are ABYSMAL when compared to other developed nations. The federal government has gifted the telecoms BILLIONS of dollars and, for the most part, they just pocketed the money and did nothing to improve our infrastructure. So yeah, we've tried the pseudo laissez faire stuff with the telecoms when it comes to providing internet service in this country and they failed. If they didn't want government intervention maybe they should have done their jobs in the first place. The only people who are against net neutrality are those that work in the telecom industry or stand to profit from the way the system is currently setup.

LOL.   Compare the size of other developed nations to ours, then get back to me.

Geography has a major major role in this

Your diatribe about "gifting" and "did nothing to improve our infrastructure" is no insanely wrong it is laughable.  Completely laughable.  Sounds like something out of a manifesto.

You should actually read who is against THIS version of net neutrality that they proposing, but that's clearly asking too much of you.  I suspect you would be more than surprised. 

For the record, I'm on the digital side that relies 100% on delivery of video over LTE, the internet, etc....I need connections as wide open as possible....that doesn't change how incredibly stupid THIS approach they are going down is.  There are ways to do this, but as we can see with other more recent implementations of major policy iniatives....they'll jack this up.

If you like your internet, you can keep your internet.

[mreezybreezy]

LOL.   Compare the size of other developed nations to ours, then get back to me.

Your diatribe about "gifting" and "did nothing to improve our infrastructure" is no insanely wrong it is laughable.  Completely laughable.  Sounds like something out of a manifesto.

A mainfesto or, ya know... fact.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131012/02124724852/decades-failed-promises-verizon-it-promises-fiber-to-get-tax-breaks-then-never-delivers.shtml

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_002683.html

But yeah, "LOL"... If you like your delusional fantasyland, you can keep your delusional fantasyland.

[reinko]

That Doomsday Prepper ranch in Idaho ain't gonna build itself everyone.

[jesmu84]

LOL.   Compare the size of other developed nations to ours, then get back to me.

Geography has a major major role in this

Your diatribe about "gifting" and "did nothing to improve our infrastructure" is no insanely wrong it is laughable.  Completely laughable.  Sounds like something out of a manifesto.

You should actually read who is against THIS version of net neutrality that they proposing, but that's clearly asking too much of you.  I suspect you would be more than surprised. 

For the record, I'm on the digital side that relies 100% on delivery of video over LTE, the internet, etc....I need connections as wide open as possible....that doesn't change how incredibly stupid THIS approach they are going down is.  There are ways to do this, but as we can see with other more recent implementations of major policy iniatives....they'll jack this up.

If you like your internet, you can keep your internet.

Do you believe private corporations, if they have control over what they want control over re: the internet, will do what's best for consumers?

I'm not asking that as a rationale for giving the government all the control. Just curious.

[naginiF]

Do you believe private corporations, if they have control over what they want control over re: the internet, will do what's best for consumers?

I'm not asking that as a rationale for giving the government all the control. Just curious.

I was at a large telecom for ~17yrs at the Sr. Director level (so not an officer but still exec) and i'd say 90% of the decisions were made for the good of the majority of customers.  Sample size of one so take it for what it's worth.

I didn't read the actual proposal, but those who have and are opposed.....what one thing would you change?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Wait until you read what is in it

http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/06/republican-fcc-commissioner-slams-obamas-332-page-plan-to-regulate-the-internet/



if you like your internet,  you can keep it.....

[brandx]

I was at a large telecom for ~17yrs at the Sr. Director level (so not an officer but still exec) and i'd say 90% of the decisions were made for the good of the majority of customers.  Sample size of one so take it for what it's worth.

I didn't read the actual proposal, but those who have and are opposed.....what one thing would you change?

How long ago were you there? I don't disagree with what you said, but I think it is just a different game now. Or, should I say war?

You have the big boys lined up on both sides. Simply put, Amazon, Google, Netflix, etc. don't want to lose out to the telecoms. If the telecoms win this battle, they could could do great harm to Netflix' bottom line (they'll make them pay through the nose for all the bandwidth they are using up) and do great harm to Google, Amazon, and others that they see as the enemy, even more so as they become bigger and bigger content providers.

Telecommunications services have always been common carriers providing basic service on equal terms to all — and to let other businesses make use of their infrastructure to provide information services.

But now Comcast and Verizon want Netflix, which accounts for 28% of all fixed-line Internet traffic in the U.S., to pay for some of that bandwidth it’s hogging which is not unreasonable in and of itself. The concern is what comes next. Bloggers, start-ups, nonprofits, and politicians or parties who aren't on the side of the telecoms, may be left behind watching as companies that can pay tolls or parties that are favored by the cable companies speed ahead.

The argument from the other side is that if the FCC passes strict rules on broadband providers, then that could bring slow innovation.

Finally, there is little doubt that the open internet has stimulated growth. What effect would partially closing it have?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Do you believe private corporations, if they have control over what they want control over re: the internet, will do what's best for consumers?

I'm not asking that as a rationale for giving the government all the control. Just curious.

Private corporation? 

Public corporations, are out to make money, to bring value to shareholders and customers.  Part of making money means keeping customers happy, otherwise you lose customers and don't make money.

The difference is that gov't and people that don't understand business or the real world would like companies to provide services to everyone, even if it means the companies lose their ass.  Or, the companies say they will do this service but need to be made whole, which means either cranking up prices or receiving subsidies....both of which get people all pissed off.

Pick your poison

[ChicosBailBonds]

Mark Cuban continues to call it like it is


Link

edit: fix link

[ChicosBailBonds]

More

http://images.burrellesluce.com/image/3570XN/3570XN_34757

[keefe]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/net-neutrality-taxes-mike-lee-fact-check

[brandx]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/net-neutrality-taxes-mike-lee-fact-check

They're lying?? 

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/02/net-neutrality-taxes-mike-lee-fact-check

Is it....interesting what commissioner Clyburn wants.  He is one of the three Democrats at the FCC and in the 11th hour he is asking Wheeler for changes.  Unprecedented.  He can read and he knows what a clusterfark this thing is.

Should be an interesting vote tomorrow....will Wheeler cave to one of his one party to pull out some of the nonsense that is in there?  Word is in our industry, he is.  Needs to in order to get Clyburn's vote.  If that means part of this monstrosity is toned down, all the better.

Either way, this will be litigated for the next 10 years.

[keefe]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/technology/path-clears-for-net-neutrality-ahead-of-fcc-vote.html?emc=edit_na_20150224&nlid=65880516&_r=0

[ChicosBailBonds]

Eric Schmidt from Google wanted changes, so Clyburn is addressing those changes.  LOL.


This is what cracks me up about this whole thing.  This concept that big powerful companies are positioned against this as if no big powerful companies are positioned for it.  Goes both ways.

My CEO made a great statement today.  I'm paraphrasing, but "the FCC is trying to use 1920's language that was created to monitor 1890's and 1900's railroads to a global network like the internet.  It is mindboggling".  And my CEO is absolutely for an open Internet, no throttling, none of that kind of stuff, but as he so adroitly stated, Washington will do what they think is right or who is paying them off to do what is right, and it will have many unintended consequences which will take years to undo.  Meanwhile, the lawyers will make millions.

[MUsoxfan]

I'm paraphrasing, but "the FCC is trying to use 1920's language that was created to monitor 1890's and 1900's railroads to a global network like the internet.  It is mindboggling". 

The NRA uses 1770's language to justify private ownership of every modern weapon. You win some and you lose some

[ChicosBailBonds]

Even liberal groups now concerned with power grab.  LOL.  Of course what these clowns want is still wrong, but at least they recognize the current ask is ridiculous.


https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/dear-fcc-rethink-those-vague-general-conduct-rules

[ChicosBailBonds]

The NRA uses 1770's language to justify private ownership of every modern weapon. You win some and you lose some

It's called the United States Constitution and can be changed.  It has already been changed nearly 30 times.   Bad analogy amigo, really bad.


This is taking an "independent" agency...cough cough...and trying to force a structure around it that won't work.  A type 2 utility classification is almost incomprehensible they would go down that path.

I loved watching the Tumblr CEO try to defend it on CNBC....he totally doesn't get it and was literally left speechless at one point. It was painful to watch, but delicious at the same time.

What is this guy....29 years old?  It shows.  Out of his league.  Comparing it to the Bill of Rights.  OMG.

Worth the video interview.  From 1:10 to 1:45.....epic

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000356959

[jesmu84]

Eric Schmidt from Google wanted changes, so Clyburn is addressing those changes.  LOL.


This is what cracks me up about this whole thing.  This concept that big powerful companies are positioned against this as if no big powerful companies are positioned for it.  Goes both ways.

My CEO made a great statement today.  I'm paraphrasing, but "the FCC is trying to use 1920's language that was created to monitor 1890's and 1900's railroads to a global network like the internet.  It is mindboggling".  And my CEO is absolutely for an open Internet, no throttling, none of that kind of stuff, but as he so adroitly stated, Washington will do what they think is right or who is paying them off to do what is right, and it will have many unintended consequences which will take years to undo.  Meanwhile, the lawyers will make millions.

How is that different from anything the government has done, ever?

[ChicosBailBonds]

How is that different from anything the government has done, ever?

It's not....but we were promised so much more in 2008 and 2012...so much newness, so much transparency, so much a different path.......

[jesmu84]

It's not....but we were promised so much more in 2008 and 2012...so much newness, so much transparency, so much a different path.......

So would you have had the same reaction to this legislation and posted the same things if this came up in 2006?

[brandx]

The FCC was created by Congress to regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable.


Net neutrality is the principle that ISPs should give consumers access to all legal content and applications on an equal basis, without favoring or blocking some sources. It also prohibits ISPs from charging content providers for speedier delivery of their content on "fast lanes" or deliberately slowing the content from content providers that may compete with ISPs.


That's the way it has always been. The GOP now wants to change the rules to benefit those whose who give them money. And idiots like Chicos blame Obama for the change when Obama wants the internet to stay the same.


I have yet to hear even one good reason to change the way the Internet has always operated.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Forward Outlook: Courts Set To Once Again Have Final Say On Net Neutrality Regulations.

With the consensus of analysts casting the FCC vote as a forgone conclusion, many reports suggest that before Congress has the chance to make progress on the issue, opponents of the pending rules will use lawsuits to block the new rules’ implementation. On the CBS Evening News, Don Dahler reported that after today’s vote, “Lobbyists will be trying to influence how the rules are interpreted, and opponents are expected to go to court to overturn the new rules.”
        Likewise, The Hill (Hattem, Trujillo) reported that the FCC vote will “set...in process a whole new battle in the courts...as industry groups file lawsuits,” and the Los Angeles Times (Puzzanghera) reports that on Wednesday, Republicans in Congress “warned that tough new regulations for online traffic...risk years of legal uncertainty.” Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) is quoted as saying: “It is going to be tested in court and it’s going to fail in court.” The Times points out that “telecom companies twice before have won court orders blocking so-called net neutrality rules, largely on grounds that the FCC had overstepped its authority,” and have “vowed to sue again.” In an editorial, the Los Angeles Times notes the FCC has crafted the proposed regulations “because its last set was rejected in January 2014 by a federal appeals court.”
        In an article titled, “FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules Expected To Unleash Court Challenges,” the Wall Street Journal (Hughes) reports that some Republicans believe the looming court battles will help them make their case that what is needed is legislation on the issue that would supersede the FCC regulations. Chairman Thune predicts that Democrats will “realize what a disaster this is” and “be a lot more anxious to work with us on a legislative solution after...the FCC issues their order.” The Journal reports that Sen. Claire McCaskill says she agrees that “it would be much preferable for us to hammer out a compromise here in Congress.” However, the Journal says other Democrats are confident that the new rules will be upheld by the courts, including Sen. Ed Markey, who is quoted as saying: “The FCC has established the strongest possible constitutional grounds for a court challenge, so I don’t think there’s a likelihood that it will be struck down.”

[Aughnanure]

The FCC was created by Congress to regulate interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable.


Net neutrality is the principle that ISPs should give consumers access to all legal content and applications on an equal basis, without favoring or blocking some sources. It also prohibits ISPs from charging content providers for speedier delivery of their content on "fast lanes" or deliberately slowing the content from content providers that may compete with ISPs.


That's the way it has always been. The GOP now wants to change the rules to benefit those whose who give them money. And idiots like Chicos blame Obama for the change when Obama wants the internet to stay the same.


I have yet to hear even one good reason to change the way the Internet has always operated.

You ... I like you.

[mreezybreezy]

Net Neutrality passes. Great line from Wheeler following:

“This is no more a plan to regulate the Internet than the First Amendment is a plan to regulate free speech."

We like our internet. Now we get to keep our internet.

[jesmu84]

A bare-bones explanation:

http://economixcomix.com/home/net-neutrality/

[rocket surgeon]

come on you guys...we need to wait until it's all out so we can read it to find out what's really in though-I have a toothache I have a toothache

[forgetful]

come on you guys...we need to wait until it's all out so we can read it to find out what's really in though-I have a toothache I have a toothache

We really need to wait 5-years before we can evaluate this properly.

[brandx]

We really need to wait 5-years before we can evaluate this properly.

And wait for the book so the other shoe will drop.

[brandx]

My favorite line of all:

“Any claims that Republicans have conceded or surrendered to the Obama administration’s power grab of the Internet through FCC action is a mischaracterization of our ongoing efforts,” said Senator John Thune, R-South Dakota, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, on Tuesday.


So, somehow, keeping the internet the way it has always been is a "power grab".

But.... as long as there are people that believe it, there will be people who say it.

[JuniorCardigan]

Well I'm glad I got to read Mark Cuban's take on the subject. If there's one person out there who I trust on the ins and outs of how ISPs work, its certainly him

[rocket surgeon]

come on you guys...we need to wait until it's all out so we can read it to find out what's really in though-I have a toothache I have a toothache

why was my quote changed from I have a toothache I have a toothache to i have a toothache i have a toothache??  that's not hte way i put it in??  did I have a toothache become a word of the gutter?

[rocket surgeon]

smething weird is going on

[rocket surgeon]

i thought stuff like this only happened in cuba or russia

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

why was my quote changed from I have a toothache I have a toothache to i have a toothache i have a toothache??  that's not hte way i put it in??  did I have a toothache become a word of the gutter?

I just thought you had a really bad toothache.

[brandx]

smething weird is going on

It's only the voices in your head. Just disregard

[keefe]

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/why-everyone-was-wrong-about-net-neutrality

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

"On this we have some early data: with full knowledge that the rules were coming, bidders in late January spent a record $44.9 billion on broadcast spectrum—exactly the kind of infrastructure investment that the laws would supposedly deter. It has been a tough year for what once passed as conventional wisdom."

[rocket surgeon]

I just thought you had a really bad toothache.

they are changing a word(not a phrase) that rhymes with chI have a toothache that some of us like to use every now and then to mean "get it" to the toothache thing.  it's not even close to vulgar or like i'm saying the word penis or something-not meaning to detract from the topic, but, there are many things in this universe i don't get, but...i know, there are starving kids in india and i'm worried about this...bless me father for i have...... 

[brandx]

they are changing a word(not a phrase) that rhymes with chI have a toothache that some of us like to use every now and then to mean "get it" to the toothache thing.  it's not even close to vulgar or like i'm saying the word penis or something-not meaning to detract from the topic, but, there are many things in this universe i don't get, but...i know, there are starving kids in india and i'm worried about this...bless me father for i have...... 

I need to get to know your dealer. That's some potent stuff your on.

[brandx]

http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/why-everyone-was-wrong-about-net-neutrality

Fascinating article, Keefe.

Yet the moment that Tom Wheeler announced his plans for strong net-neutrality rules, on February 4th, broadband stocks jumped, and they have stayed buoyant. This has confused experts. Craig Moffett, whom I consider to be the smartest telecom analyst around, was forced to blame the market. “I think it just shows you that the market doesn’t really understand these issues,” he said.


I wonder if Moffett reads Scoop and listened to CBB one too many times. That has been his mantra for a couple years.

[MUsoxfan]

Fascinating article, Keefe.

Yet the moment that Tom Wheeler announced his plans for strong net-neutrality rules, on February 4th, broadband stocks jumped, and they have stayed buoyant. This has confused experts. Craig Moffett, whom I consider to be the smartest telecom analyst around, was forced to blame the market. “I think it just shows you that the market doesn’t really understand these issues,” he said.


I wonder if Moffett reads Scoop and listened to CBB one too many times. That has been his mantra for a couple years.

Chicos denied the spike in this very thread

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

Not all bits are created equal....exactly right.   

[keefe]

I wonder if Moffett reads Scoop

Why wouldn't he read Scoop? It's the Early Bird for the world outside the Beltway!

[real chili 83]

Al Franken is one of the head morons on this.  Uff da.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Netflix having second thoughts.  Gee, no kidding.  Title II, so stupid on so many fronts.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/l-gordon-crovitz-netflix-recants-on-obamanet-1425854967

[ChicosBailBonds]

LOL.  Just keeps getting better.  Nice job Netflix....nice job. 


http://images.burrellesluce.com/image/3570XN/3570XN_35135

[ChicosBailBonds]

First two lawsuits filed today

http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/internet-providers-sue-to-kill-net-neutrality-20150323

[ChicosBailBonds]

New fees coming.....if you liked your internet, you can keep it


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-broadband-fees-20150409-story.html#page=1

[brandx]

"It's not clear yet, however, if most consumers would end up paying more in total USF fees than they do now."

Anyone else wonder if he ever reads the articles that he posts?

But he's gotta be right because fees had never gone up before the Kenyan snatched control of the Internet.

[keefe]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/10/opinion/global-threats-to-net-neutrality.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-4&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=article

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.cnet.com/news/fccs-net-neutrality-rules-hit-federal-register-lawsuit-underway/